Episode 1237 Scott Adams： Lizard People Take Over congress, and More News Like That
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 7 minutes
Words per Minute
148.8947
Summary
It's time for the final Coffee with Scott Adams of 2020, the worst year in the history of years. Join us for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day, a toast to the worst of all years, 2020.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Oh, hey, I didn't see you there. Happy New Year. It's time. It's time for the final coffee with
00:00:16.860
Scott Adams of 2020, the worst year in the history of years. How about a little 2021?
00:00:23.120
As I saw on a humorous sign, you think 2020 was bad? Wait till 2020 becomes 2021 and I can drink.
00:00:33.820
Yeah, I didn't make that up, but it's funny. Oh, I'm a little bit late. Just a little bit.
00:00:40.940
Well, if you'd like to enjoy this episode of Coffee with Scott Adams, the thing you need the most
00:00:46.400
is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or gels or stein a cante jug or flask, a vessel of any kind,
00:00:52.420
fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the
00:00:58.780
dopamine hit of the day, a toast to the worst year of all years, 2020. Are we ready for this one to
00:01:07.800
be done? Yeah, we are. Let's drink to that. Go. Ah, well, New Year's Eve is a terrific,
00:01:20.320
terrific, terrific holiday for people who like alcohol and like gathering in large groups during
00:01:28.920
a pandemic. I don't like either of those things, so it won't be a big night for me. I'll probably
00:01:35.980
go to bed at 830. So you want to talk about the news? Okay. Let's talk about Elaria Baldwin,
00:01:46.440
Elaria Baldwin, Elaria Baldwin's wife. Now, I want to tell you, if you want to know what bad luck
00:01:53.900
looks like, bad luck is when you have a personal scandal, if you can call it a scandal, it's more
00:02:01.300
like a curiosity, during a slow news period. Oh my God, poor Baldwin's. The story itself,
00:02:12.080
if you know, is that Elaria Baldwin's wife, the yoga teacher, Elaria Baldwin, was actually born,
00:02:18.720
her name was Hillary, and apparently she'd been telling people that she was born, grew up in Spain
00:02:25.060
and she was Spanish, but it turns out that's not quite it. She was born in Massachusetts and grew
00:02:32.200
up there, but her parents have some travel and, you know, they have some connection to Spain.
00:02:37.280
And I think she's probably bilingual, so that counts. But here's the thing. In terms of how much
00:02:45.080
you and I should care about this story, the answer is zero, right? Zero. It doesn't have any effect on
00:02:53.260
you. Now, of course, Alec Baldwin was quite public in his political opinions about the president,
00:03:00.480
so it feels like it's fair to say things about Alec Baldwin, but it's not really fair to say things
00:03:08.380
about Alec Baldwin's wife, because, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember her becoming a
00:03:15.940
political figure. I mean, she's a public figure, because she does some things on Instagram, etc.,
00:03:20.880
but she's not a political figure. I say leave her alone. That's my take. I'm no fan of Alec Baldwin's
00:03:28.640
political stuff, but I'm a huge fan of his work, you know, his actual talent as an actor,
00:03:34.860
especially a comedic actor. It's sort of unparalleled. He's a tremendous talent. But,
00:03:41.160
of course, he was obnoxious to many of us doing the political thing. I'm still sorry for him,
00:03:48.100
and I don't have any problem, really. I mean, it's not my problem, or it's not even a problem at all.
00:03:53.760
Well, if Hilaria wanted to reinvent herself, I don't really have a problem with that at all.
00:04:03.440
Now, I have a little history with that myself. I have, on occasion, maybe reinvented myself.
00:04:11.580
I'm not going to say that's never happened. And did it hurt me? No. Did it hurt anybody else
00:04:19.640
if I reinvented myself? No. Not really. Now, in my case, it was more of a minor case. I used to
00:04:28.120
work in a resort, a summer resort near where I lived. And so during the school year, I would be
00:04:36.260
one person, basically a nerd. So who I would be in terms of reputationally would be the guy who got
00:04:45.960
good grades. And so I'd be sort of a nerd, you know, that kind of a character. So that's who I
00:04:51.620
would be all during the school year. And then the summer would come, and I would go to work with a
00:04:56.120
bunch of people who didn't know me at all. It was a bunch of strangers from other towns who came in,
00:05:00.960
and we all worked at this resort. And so I would be a brand new person every summer. And in the summer,
00:05:08.180
I would be an athlete. So I would just be a different person. So I'd play four or five sports
00:05:15.400
a day, usually at the resort during breaks and lunch and after work. And nobody would be aware
00:05:22.760
that I had any academic qualifications, because I was not using them in any way. But they'd be very
00:05:29.280
aware that I was the one saying, hey, let's start a soccer game, or, you know, let's pick up size and
00:05:35.720
play some softball or something. So I would basically, and quite intentionally, reinvent myself
00:05:41.820
every summer as not being a nerd for a few months. And then I'd go back to being a nerd. And did I break
00:05:49.260
any laws? Not really. It's not exactly the same situation, of course. But I'm just saying that I don't
00:05:56.900
mind people reinventing themselves, even if they put a little artifice on it. You know, a little bit
00:06:03.440
of a shine, you know, just buff it up a little bit, remove the scratches. It's okay with me.
00:06:10.860
So she got caught. That's the problem. But that's the only problem. It doesn't bother us in any way.
00:06:16.140
So I wish them well, actually. I don't have any bad feelings about the Baldwin's. I hope that they
00:06:20.400
get through it. But what bad luck to have this happen during the slowest,
00:06:24.200
the slowest news cycle of the entire year? And then, ah, timing. There was a, I tweeted a
00:06:31.120
little piece about a 3D printed e-assist bike. Now, the big part of the story is not that you can
00:06:40.620
3D print an object. We know that. And it's not even that you could 3D print a bicycle,
00:06:48.360
which is actually kind of impressive. But at least what I could tell is that the 3D
00:06:54.120
printed a better bicycle than regular bicycles, because it was a solid frame and real super
00:07:01.240
light with some materials, etc. Then they put an e-assist in it. They put the batteries in the
00:07:06.660
frame of the bike, so you can, you get the assist of the battery. And I'll tell you, I keep saying
00:07:13.780
this, but if you haven't tried one, you need to try one. Because if you're thinking, hey, I don't want
00:07:21.420
an e-bike because I'm not going to get enough exercise. You just go further and you go up bigger
00:07:26.600
hills. It doesn't take away the effort. It just reduces it so it's more fun. So you can go up
00:07:32.280
bigger hills. You can go faster or go longer. You'll all have one eventually. So Antifa, according to
00:07:38.220
Andy Ngo reporting, Antifa held a soccer tournament. And in their signs, they said no cleats. So I'm glad
00:07:51.440
they're opposed to violence. No cleats. But when you see Antifa forming a soccer league,
00:07:57.640
right, right. So as soon as, as soon as Trump is out of office, Antifa goes from a revolutionary force
00:08:07.980
to, hey, did anybody bring a soccer ball? Kind of a sudden transition. Apparently, a bunch of them
00:08:16.840
checked into the same hotel. And then when they went to check out, they decided that all en masse,
00:08:24.120
they weren't going to pay. So they would just use the hotel's services, but not pay.
00:08:29.440
And they said the hotel should be paid by money that comes from defunding the police.
00:08:36.300
Now, they've obviously just turned into a complete joke from whatever they used to be,
00:08:43.560
which was part joke, part political movement. But if you just base it on these two stories,
00:08:49.220
they've devolved into a complete joke. And I think the problem is they don't have anything to push
00:08:53.740
against. Because protesting against Biden just won't look the same. It just won't look the same.
00:09:02.860
So we've got an organization, but we can't really do what we were meant to do, which is protest,
00:09:09.300
because it's Biden. How about soccer? Why not? This would be another example of why I say
00:09:19.700
you should not be sad if you replace one kind of president that you really liked with an entirely
00:09:27.960
different kind of person. For a while, right? We get to choose again later. But I feel as though
00:09:34.740
you can't get everything done with one president. There are some things that only a Trump can do,
00:09:41.240
but then there are other things that only a Trump can't do. And getting rid of Antifa might be one
00:09:48.200
of those things. Don't know for sure, but it feels like one of those things that Trump would be the
00:09:54.500
only person who couldn't make it go away, because it was really, in many ways, it was about him, or he
00:10:00.500
gave the energy to it, you might say. So sometimes you just need a Biden to, you know, sweep up,
00:10:06.720
clean up the broken glass from the previous administration and stuff, and then you go back
00:10:13.040
to a Trump, or something like it, or a different kind of president. But I believe you should get
00:10:18.540
rid of the myth that having your preferred president for, you know, 20 years in a row would be a good
00:10:25.080
thing. It never would be. It never would be good to have one president for a long time, no matter how
00:10:31.580
good they were. Because you just need that other personality to get some kinds of stuff done. All
00:10:37.900
right. I was asking about vitamin D, and whether people get their vitamin D levels checked when they
00:10:47.200
have a COVID diagnosis. Now, outside of the study, you know, doing a study, but just as a, is it, is it
00:10:54.940
routine to check your vitamin D levels if you have a positive coronavirus diagnosis? And the answer is
00:11:02.940
no. Apparently that doesn't happen. So does it seem weird to you? Now, it may be that it's just a
00:11:09.860
practical thing. It could be that you wouldn't do anything differently, because I'm getting mixed
00:11:16.720
messages about whether giving people vitamin D once they've been diagnosed with COVID works or it doesn't.
00:11:24.940
I've heard both things, that it works or it doesn't, it's standard procedure or it isn't. Can
00:11:30.700
anybody confirm that? Because I've heard confidently both things. Confidently that they always use it
00:11:37.280
because it works, and confidently that they don't use it because it doesn't work. Which one of those
00:11:42.340
is true? And why don't I know that now? I mean, it's a long time to be in this pandemic for me not to
00:11:50.800
know such a basic thing about it, and I don't know why that's not obvious to me. Somebody says post hoc
00:11:58.220
working, not really. Yeah, so here's the thing. It can be true that people who are low on vitamin D
00:12:06.060
have the worst outcomes, while it could also be true that if you check into the hospital with COVID
00:12:12.480
and they give you a bunch of vitamin D, it might not make that much difference. Now, that's the
00:12:17.080
question. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I'm looking for a fact check. But it wouldn't be
00:12:21.540
inconsistent, necessarily, because it might be too late by that point, right? Just the timing doesn't
00:12:28.040
work. So that could be one thing. But I got a big question about that. Just because your vitamin D
00:12:33.960
levels are low, that doesn't mean vitamin D is the problem. It could be just an indicator of bad health
00:12:39.640
in general. It could be just a correlation. Yeah. So we got big questions on that. But the main thing
00:12:46.040
is that we don't check vitamin D automatically. Somebody named Kurt Eichenwald, who is a name
00:12:54.580
that I'm positive I should know who he is, but I don't. It's a name I've heard before, and I know that
00:13:01.800
I feel as though conservatives don't like him, but I don't know why. So I don't know who he is,
00:13:06.740
basically. He's a semi-famous person in the world of politics, but I have no information about him.
00:13:12.940
However, he did a tweet in which he was saying that I guess some members of his family have died
00:13:18.600
from COVID. And when he thinks about, I'm paraphrasing here, but when he thinks about people
00:13:23.440
having a New Year's Eve party, which he believes would put people at greater risk,
00:13:31.460
he says that he confesses that he has thoughts of wishing they died a horrible death from COVID,
00:13:41.660
the people who go to these parties with the assumption that they would be spreading it by
00:13:48.280
going to these parties. Now, there was a lot of pushback on him saying he's a terrible person,
00:13:53.620
and why can't people just live their lives? And if you're afraid of the coronavirus,
00:13:57.820
you can hide while everybody else lives their lives. And I've heard the argument,
00:14:03.200
and I don't disagree with it. So I'm seeing people on social media, imagine I have an opinion
00:14:10.100
I don't about lockdowns or no lockdowns or whatever. My opinion, just so you've heard it for the first
00:14:16.160
time, is that, of course, we should have tried it. If you're asking me, should we have tried lockdowns?
00:14:23.400
Yeah, yeah, because we didn't know. We thought it might save millions of people, maybe. So of course,
00:14:30.860
it was worth trying. Do we know now how well they work? Not exactly. But do you still think,
00:14:40.240
as of today, would you say that lockdowns wouldn't at least slow the number of people going into the
00:14:46.580
ICUs? I feel as if it would be hard to imagine that social distancing doesn't work
00:14:53.920
at some level, if all you're trying to do is keep the ICUs from being overwhelmed. So my opinion is,
00:15:02.240
common sense tells me it probably makes a big difference to the ICU levels, which is important.
00:15:09.200
But that's different from saying we should therefore necessarily throw people's rights to be human
00:15:17.200
beings living in the world away. So there's a balance. You've got to make some balance. So I think
00:15:23.540
people need to do what they can do, etc. But here's my take. If Kurt Eichenwald has had deaths in the
00:15:30.200
family, and he believes that other people acting in what would, to some people, look selfish,
00:15:36.740
and it might kill other people, I don't have any problem with Kurt Eichenwald using his other
00:15:43.540
freedom of speech. He has the freedom of speech. And so he has every right to say that he believes
00:15:51.460
that people who do this are worthy of a horrible death. I don't have any problem with that opinion.
00:15:59.380
Now, I'm not saying it's my opinion. I'm just saying it's a completely reasonable opinion
00:16:05.220
expressed through his freedom of speech. So I have no pushback on this at all. But I also
00:16:12.280
am not telling you how to live your life or lockdown or not lockdown. You'll figure that out. I'm more of
00:16:18.940
a fatalist about this. You could tell people to lockdown all day long. But at some point, it's just
00:16:25.560
not going to happen. And we're probably at that point, right? So does it matter to argue that people
00:16:32.680
should or should not cheat on the lockdown? It's a useless argument. People will cheat on the lockdown.
00:16:41.400
People will. It's 100% guaranteed. Now, you've also not seen me doing the old simple story about
00:16:49.860
Governor Newsom said we should stay home. But then he went to the French Laundry, an expensive
00:16:56.640
restaurant. Do you know why I don't make fun of politicians for being hypocrites? Because we all
00:17:04.940
are. They're just being exactly like you and me. If the French Laundry was open, then not only did
00:17:14.900
Governor Newsom have every right to go there, but so did everybody else who could afford it anyway.
00:17:20.260
Pretty expensive. But Newsom was just doing what everybody was doing. Talking good in public,
00:17:29.820
privately cheating like crazy. Right? So when you say that the politicians are all hypocrites,
00:17:36.820
it's true. It's also not saying anything. Because it's just saying they're people.
00:17:42.020
Did we have an option of electing a non-person? No. No. Now, if Gavin Newsom had forced a restaurant to
00:17:52.180
open during the coronavirus so he could go to a restaurant, I'd say, whoa, whoa, you're not playing
00:17:58.680
by the same rules. But if he literally played by the same rules, a restaurant is open, you can go to it.
00:18:07.140
You know why you can go to it? Because it's open. The government said you could.
00:18:11.000
So if the government said he could go to that restaurant, and he went to that restaurant,
00:18:16.120
I don't care that he told other people to stay home, because it's what everybody's doing.
00:18:20.740
They're all cheating like crazy. I don't know anybody who's not cheating. Honestly, I don't.
00:18:26.300
So I'm not going to go hard on those guys for having an opinion and doing what everybody's doing.
00:18:34.800
I was listening to somebody on Twitter saying that Trump didn't get reelected because of his bad
00:18:42.640
handling of the coronavirus. And then I asked for examples. What would be an example of Trump's bad
00:18:49.760
handling of the coronavirus? Now, what the interesting thing here is that most people who believe
00:18:55.540
somebody says restaurants were open to others. Are you telling me that the French laundry was
00:19:02.920
illegally opened? I don't think that was that was not the case. Nobody's saying the French laundry was
00:19:09.660
illegally opened. Here's a brainwashing. Name one thing that Trump did wrong on the coronavirus,
00:19:18.620
because the the fake news has gotten away with a great brainwashing framing. They basically framed it
00:19:27.020
in a way that you're believing, which is that the problem was Trump, not the way they reported on
00:19:33.040
Trump. For example, did the public trust Trump after the news inaccurately said he had thought about
00:19:42.020
drinking bleach for the coronavirus? Now, that never happened. It was fake news. But what did the
00:19:48.540
public think of Trump and his scientific opinions after that? Okay, how about Trump wanted to open the
00:19:56.120
schools earlier than a lot of the experts? Was he right or wrong? I think time has shown that he was
00:20:03.100
right. The one so so the times that Trump disagreed with the experts are on opening schools. And he was
00:20:10.780
right, because the experts have now come to his opinion. He wanted to close the the borders to travel
00:20:17.600
from China. Now you could argue that he didn't close enough or fast enough, whatever. But it's true that
00:20:23.600
the experts were still saying don't do that. So the two times we know, he disagreed with the experts.
00:20:30.340
The question was, has Trump ever corrected his statement on the bleach? No, he said he was joking
00:20:40.900
because he just wanted it to go away, which was the wrong way to play it. It was a big mistake on this
00:20:46.600
part. I would say that was a huge mistake, persuasion wise and every other wise.
00:20:50.460
But now, so what is it? What is it that Trump did a specific thing that his experts told him not to do
00:21:01.820
that caused a problem? Now, some say he underplayed the virus. But what did you do differently because
00:21:12.700
of that? What happened differently? Because he underplayed the virus? Can you think of anything?
00:21:20.260
Was there somebody who would have worn a mask and didn't? I doubt it. Probably not. Do you believe
00:21:27.420
that if Obama had been president, we'll just pick him for as a as a Democrat? Do you believe if Obama
00:21:33.600
had told them had told Republicans to give up some of their freedom and wear a mask, because it's good
00:21:41.180
for the collective? Do you think the Republicans would have said, Oh, okay, yeah, that Democrat
00:21:47.300
President Obama wants to take our rights away and make us wear masks. So yeah, I'm okay with that.
00:21:54.880
If you think about it, Trump probably got more cooperation from conservatives, simply by being
00:22:03.220
closer to their starting point of view, which is a little skepticism, right? So by being closer to the
00:22:10.080
point of view of the people who needed to be persuaded, he probably did the best job anybody
00:22:14.440
could have done of persuading Republicans to at least wear masks in public. Right? Now, you could
00:22:22.140
argue whether the masks work or not, I take it still as a risk management decision, which is there's
00:22:28.440
good enough reason to think it might, that you still ought to put a lot of effort into it. All right.
00:22:34.000
So give me one example that's not a problem that the press created, that was something Trump did,
00:22:42.500
and it has to have this quality, has to be disagreed with the experts, and also was wrong. Because we
00:22:50.000
have two situations where he disagreed with the experts, and he was right, and the experts were
00:22:55.620
wrong. Give me one example where Trump disagreed with the experts and then was wrong. I don't know of
00:23:02.640
any. Do you? And yet, half of the country, maybe more, maybe 60% of the country, 70% of the country,
00:23:10.680
maybe more, has been convinced by the press that Trump not only did a bad job, but it was a total
00:23:16.780
disaster. Somebody's saying masks, but there's no mask inconsistency with Trump. Because Trump has
00:23:25.480
always said, when the experts said no masks, he agreed with them, and you can't fault him for agreeing
00:23:32.760
with the experts, right? Even if he's wrong, agreeing with the experts isn't a mistake.
00:23:38.880
Then, when the experts changed and said, yeah, those masks are actually important, wear some masks,
00:23:47.120
Trump, what did Trump say? He said, yeah, listen to the experts. Wear your masks when they tell you
00:23:54.960
to wear a mask. I don't feel like he caused anybody to not wear a mask at all. Now, I see in the comments
00:24:00.980
I'm being prompted for the rapid testing thing. I personally have a gigantic, gigantic criticism
00:24:08.960
with the Trump administration's handling of testing. Not talking about the contact
00:24:16.340
testing, tracing. I think that got away from us too fast. Once it becomes too big, you can't do the
00:24:21.920
contact tracing. So I don't have enough knowledge to criticize about whether we could have done that.
00:24:27.680
I just think not. I think the United States was going to get infected no matter what. Probably
00:24:32.200
wouldn't have mattered. But when it comes to the rapid testing and getting them approved faster,
00:24:38.000
I feel as if that problem is almost entirely in the FDA. But since the boss is the boss,
00:24:46.200
Trump has to take that criticism if it turns out that the reason we didn't get those rapid tests
00:24:53.600
are what it looks like. It looks like incompetence by the somebody. Incompetence or somebody who's
00:24:59.860
bought off in the government. So if you're asking me my criticism, it would be mostly about that
00:25:05.820
with the caveat that my criticism could completely go away if the government had ever simply addressed
00:25:13.420
it. They just had to talk about it in public. If even once President Trump had shown an understanding
00:25:20.720
of the rapid testing concept, which is different than testing, if you think it's like testing,
00:25:25.980
but fast, you don't understand what it is. It's about cheap little tests that aren't as accurate,
00:25:32.180
but if you do enough of them, you get a better result. So if Trump had ever said, look, there's this
00:25:37.560
concept of rapid testing. We are looking into it, but there's a reason we can't do it. And here's the
00:25:43.720
reason. I might agree, might disagree, might understand it, might not understand it,
00:25:47.960
but I wouldn't feel like it was a mistake per se. But the fact it wasn't addressed and it was such a
00:25:55.640
big issue in the public, at least on social media, that was a mistake. That was a clear mistake. But
00:26:00.860
here's my point. If you ask a Democrat to list Trump's mistakes, they'll say, wow, there's so many
00:26:08.440
of them. But that one won't be on the list. The only one that I would consider a very reasonable
00:26:15.320
criticism won't even be on the Democrats' radar. Because why? Because the news didn't cover the
00:26:22.480
issue. The issue, I think, ended up being in conservative Twitter and kind of just died there.
00:26:30.080
Right? So I don't even think they've ever heard of that issue. So they are brainwashed to believe
00:26:36.460
that Trump did a bad job. And the one thing he actually might have done a bad job, and even
00:26:40.740
that's a question mark, they don't even know about it. So there's your situation. It looks like there'll
00:26:48.820
be 30, there was 3,740 COVID fatalities yesterday. We'll probably hit the 5,000 mark in a few weeks,
00:26:59.880
I would guess, 5,000 per day. And even today, somebody said it's an ordinary illness, and we
00:27:09.200
should not be concerned about it. Does that, is there anybody in the comments, are any of you still
00:27:15.080
saying that COVID is just like the flu? Anybody? Does anybody still think that? Let me just see in
00:27:24.260
the comments. So yeah, so I'm seeing lots of people who are saying it's an ordinary illness.
00:27:38.600
It's amazing. You know, there was a time when I think that was a reasonable skepticism.
00:27:45.080
It's not one I ever bought into. So I've never been on the, on the side that, hey, it's just a
00:27:50.620
regular flu. But there was a time when a reasonable person could have thought that.
00:27:58.000
This is not that time. We are so far past that time. It is so unambiguously obvious that this is
00:28:07.740
way bigger than a normal illness. And it's, what's different about it is it looks like you could do
00:28:14.320
something about it that, you know, that would be, keep it to a short-term situation.
00:28:21.040
And people will make bad analogies. They'll say, but Scott, people drive, people die from driving cars.
00:28:28.380
Right? Now, the difference is that there are situations that can't be fixed in any way that
00:28:34.460
we know about it, at least not fully fixed. So driving cars is just dangerous. We don't know
00:28:43.340
how to fix that and still have a civilization. So anything that's sort of a permanent situation,
00:28:50.400
you can't compare to something that we hoped we could, you know, knock it out in six months,
00:28:56.080
it might take a year. But you can't compare any permanent situation to a temporary situation.
00:29:09.160
So on CNN, they said election officials from both parties have said that the 2020 election was one of
00:29:15.100
the most secure ever. That's CNN. CNN is reporting that the 2020 election was one of the most secure
00:29:25.380
ever. Do you accept that? Does that sound like a fact to you? I think so. I actually accept that fact.
00:29:36.660
I believe that this, that the 2020 election was one of the most secure elections we've ever had.
00:29:42.800
Any pushback on that? Does anybody disagree that 2020 was, as far as we can tell, one of the most
00:29:53.420
secure elections we've ever had? I just want to see how badly you're reacting to that.
00:30:02.820
Well, here's the trick. I assume that they've all been corrupt. Why wouldn't they be? It's entirely,
00:30:10.280
there's no conflict. There's no conflict at all in saying it was the most secure election we've ever
00:30:16.500
had. And also, it was nearly completely unsecure. Both could be true. The most secure election we've
00:30:26.100
ever had might be 10% secure. Maybe it was, you know, maybe that's the best we've ever done.
00:30:32.100
But it wasn't secure. It was just no worse than we've ever done. I don't see any reason to believe
00:30:40.340
that it hasn't always been this way. You know, maybe there's a little extra cheating,
00:30:47.080
Let's see this. Here's somebody, I just saw a random tweet. Somebody went to a specific hospital
00:30:55.780
last night to see how busy it was, and it was empty. Again, the hospital was empty. I personally
00:31:03.300
know somebody locally who works in a hospital that is not busy in Northern California. So,
00:31:11.660
is it a big old fraud that coronavirus is impacting the hospitals? Because I told you there was this
00:31:21.100
one guy who went to one hospital that one time, right? So that's pretty conclusive proof. And what
00:31:27.820
about that other guy who went to another hospital that one time and it wasn't busy? Well, there's some
00:31:32.420
solid evidence for you. And then I personally know, I personally know somebody who works at a hospital
00:31:38.040
and says it's not busy. In fact, it's extremely not busy. So it's all a big lie about hospitals being
00:31:45.740
impacted, right? No, that's not how it works. It doesn't work that way. Nobody is saying all the
00:31:56.520
hospitals are all busy. Nobody's saying that. People are saying specifically that in hotspots,
00:32:03.020
the ICUs and the places that are, you know, equipped to handle COVID patients, that those are over
00:32:09.380
capacity. Nobody's saying that in the town where the COVID infections are not that bad, that those
00:32:17.060
hospitals are impacted. My area has, you know, it's sort of bad-ish at the moment, but it's not the
00:32:24.920
worst part of California. So if you're a regular hospital, people do fewer elective surgeries, of course
00:32:31.140
it's not busy. It's supposed to look like that. And don't, wouldn't you assume by now also that the
00:32:37.900
COVID patients are treated in specific places at this point, you know, and that those would have the
00:32:44.000
capacity problem? So I've heard that Southern California, at least some counties, is at zero ICU
00:32:51.760
excess capacity. They're already at full capacity. So that's the problem. The problem is not that there
00:32:58.400
a few, maybe there are even more hospitals that are empty. Now you might say to yourself, but why
00:33:04.500
can't you use those empty hospitals and increase your capacity? Well, it's ICUs that matter. And that's
00:33:10.760
not so easy. All right. Random Twitter user Justin Bradshaw was tweeting about Trump's narcissism and gave
00:33:22.340
these examples. He said in a tweet, yeah, remember Trump getting upset about not winning the Nobel
00:33:28.280
Prize or getting on the cover of Time or more recently Melania not getting on the cover of fashion
00:33:34.440
magazines? All evidence of that exact narcissistic trait. Is it? Is it? Is this it? Would you say that
00:33:46.340
Trump creating peace of the Middle East and then not getting, not winning the Nobel Prize? Do you think
00:33:54.040
that's unfair? I feel as though the real issue here is how Trump is treated by the fake press and by the
00:34:02.580
fake award companies and everything else? Isn't the issue more about how he's treated? Because I'm not Trump.
00:34:11.400
And I think he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Can I be a narcissist on his behalf? It would be one
00:34:19.700
thing if Trump were the only person in the world who thought he should get a Nobel Peace Prize.
00:34:26.240
That you could argue would be kind of narcissistic if nobody else thought he deserved a Nobel Peace
00:34:32.440
Prize. But there are probably somewhere in the neighborhood of a billion or so people, if you count
00:34:39.700
other countries, maybe a billion people think Trump should have won the Nobel Peace Prize. Let me say
00:34:45.860
that again. Maybe a billion. A billion. I don't think that's probably an exaggeration, right? In this
00:34:54.360
country, which is probably half the country, thinks he deserved a Nobel Peace Prize. So if you just take
00:34:59.480
that into other populations who are aware enough of American politics, you might find a billion people
00:35:05.780
who agreed with him. Now, if a billion people agree with you, and you know, you could soften that to,
00:35:11.840
oh, it's only a hundred million, whatever it is. But if they agree with you, I don't know that that's a
00:35:17.860
mental problem. Because I see it too. It's not, he's not imagining it. I see it. Then the other example
00:35:27.380
was, he wasn't, didn't get the cover of time. Basically, it's exactly the same issue. And the other thing
00:35:33.320
that people don't quite realize about Trump is that before he was president, he was a branding
00:35:38.920
genius. The Trump brand became what it is, not because he's rich. There are tons of billionaires
00:35:47.040
you've never heard of. His brand became what it is because he's a brand managing expert. Part of
00:35:54.420
managing his brand is stuff such as getting on magazine covers, winning awards, etc. It's just part
00:36:01.280
of managing his brand. Of course, he thinks he should have been on the magazine, most important
00:36:07.280
person on Time magazine. How many other people think that too? Millions, millions and millions
00:36:14.820
of people think he should have been Time person of the year. Millions. So I don't know how that can be
00:36:20.960
a mental problem on Trump when so many millions of people are looking at the same stuff and have the
00:36:26.680
same opinion about him. All right. Minneapolis Police Department shot a man tonight during a traffic
00:36:38.080
stop. So he's alleged that he opened fire first and then the Minnesota police killed him. So that's
00:36:46.400
the story. They shot a man. Quote, he was a man. That's all you need to know. Is there anything else
00:36:54.600
you need to know about the man? Is there anything relevant to the story and relevant to the national
00:37:04.000
conversation that you'd sort of expect out of a story about a place that still stinging from a George
00:37:16.860
Floyd situation? I feel as if there's one extra piece of data that we would need to know.
00:37:24.600
I can't think of it. Yeah, his eye color. Exactly. How do we know his eye color?
00:37:32.600
Moving on. So the greatest failure of government in my lifetime, we just saw this week with the
00:37:40.840
COVID stimulus bill. And I'm not even going to get into the awkward, stupid details of what Congress did
00:37:49.640
and who was on what side and, you know, who used what trick to stop this or postpone that vote or
00:37:57.360
whatever. None of it matters too much. I've never seen more incredible incompetence than Congress this
00:38:06.300
year. I've never seen anything like it. I was trying to think, lots of times people have made mistakes,
00:38:12.300
but I've never seen incompetence like this. I mean, this is some serious incompetence. And,
00:38:22.300
I tweeted that watching them work is, watching Congress work is like watching a bunch of,
00:38:32.180
uh, no, I won't even say it on the live stream. You can read the tweet. It's X-rated. Um, and
00:38:40.400
when I look at this, I have, I have just hatred for them. But here's a little, uh, thing that'll ruin
00:38:50.000
you forever. Have you ever noticed that, uh, I don't know, maybe this is only me, but have you ever
00:38:57.040
known somebody for a while and then suddenly one day you saw their animal? Now, here's what I mean by
00:39:04.360
that. I once dated a woman thousand years ago who I once saw just a fleeting moment. I looked at her
00:39:16.400
face and I saw another animal. Now, I don't mean that she looked like that animal. I mean, it reminded
00:39:24.200
me in a way that I could never unsee. And from that moment on, she looked more like that animal
00:39:32.220
than like a person to me once it was in my head. So once you see the animal, you can't unsee it.
00:39:40.360
And the Democrats have two politicians that strike me as lizards. Schumer is one. Somebody needs to tell
00:39:50.380
Schumer to stop doing this with his glasses. Can somebody please talk to him and maybe not talk
00:39:57.160
exactly like a lizard? Because when I see him talk, this is what I see. Eh, President Trump.
00:40:09.460
That's all I see. I just see a lizard person. And it's even worse. There's another Senator,
00:40:17.880
Ron Wyden. Have you ever seen Ron Wyden? He's quite an anti-Trumper. When he talks, I only see a giant
00:40:25.760
lizard. It's almost like he's replaced with a lizard. Yeah, President Trump.
00:40:34.600
Right? You can see it. As soon as I mention it, you can't see it any other way, right?
00:40:43.520
So in my mind, Congress has just devolved into not even a human kind of a thing. They just look like
00:40:52.360
monsters at this point. They don't look human. Because you'd expect a human to give you a hand,
00:40:57.960
right? Hey, hey, I'm starving to death. The coronavirus has destroyed everything I have.
00:41:05.200
Please, please send me a check. Help me. And what did the lizard people say?
00:41:21.220
So thanks a lot, Congress, for being the most worthless group of people I've ever seen in my
00:41:28.200
life. There's a video going around, I think Jack Posobiec was tweeting it, of Jake Tapper talking
00:41:37.460
about the president after one of the debates, and saying that the president was just lying to the
00:41:43.700
people about a vaccine coming before the end of the year. And Jake was quite disturbed.
00:41:51.220
By the president just lying to the people. You should have seen Jake's face. He was upset about
00:41:58.920
this disgusting, despicable lie that a vaccine could be available by the end of the year.
00:42:07.660
Disgusting. Now, I wonder what would happen if Kennedy had been doing his moonshot speech
00:42:15.620
during the fake news era? And let's say Kennedy had been a Republican. How would Jake Tapper handle
00:42:24.260
that news? When Kennedy said he was going to put a man on the moon, would Jake Tapper say,
00:42:31.040
he's just lying to the people? He's just straight out lying. There's not going to be any man on the moon.
00:42:43.280
How did the people put up with this lying? Disgusting. All right. Josh Hawley, Senator Hawley,
00:42:57.920
he's going to join with Representative Mo Brooks, and they're going to force a debate
00:43:04.140
on the electoral college electors from at least one state. So will that change the result of the
00:43:12.960
election? The smart people are saying, no, it won't change the election, because it'll just be
00:43:18.880
a delay and a debate, and then they'll just go back to doing what they were going to do.
00:43:22.480
And some people have said that Josh Hawley is just positioning himself to run for president,
00:43:31.080
to which I say, it's a pretty good job. If he's positioning himself to run for president,
00:43:38.400
and he's the only one who picked up the free money, this is free money. Do you think that Josh
00:43:44.980
Hawley will pay any political price for objecting to the vote? And he's objecting,
00:43:52.480
based on constitutional grounds, Pennsylvania ignored their own constitution when they changed
00:44:01.000
the rules. And so he's at least using something that's not in dispute. It's not in dispute that
00:44:06.840
they did what they did. And it would be fair to say that that shouldn't have happened.
00:44:12.400
So at least he's sticking with observable, straight news. He's not going into the fraud allegations
00:44:19.860
where it would be a little dicier. So he gets, for free, he gets all the support of the Trump-loving
00:44:27.340
people who say, finally, finally, we've got a, you know, a senator who will back us. Now, by the way,
00:44:34.020
he's not the only politician. You've got, you know, your Matt Gaetz, you know, some other notable people
00:44:39.280
are on the same side. And I'm saying that they're all doing the same smart thing.
00:44:42.720
So if you want to run for president, and you want Trump supporters to transfer their support to you,
00:44:50.200
this would be the time to do it. So politically, I would say, completely smart.
00:44:58.540
Will it make any difference? Probably not. But here's the question I have. When they go and debate,
00:45:03.500
do they get to see evidence? Will the public get to see anything like evidence presented and then
00:45:11.380
that evidence challenged? Or does it happen behind closed doors and there's no evidence? They just,
00:45:18.060
they just talk to each other for two hours and come back and vote? Is that all? So I'm not sure
00:45:25.620
we're really going to see something like an unofficial trial in public for the evidence. I don't think
00:45:32.000
that's going to happen, is it? Because they only have two hours. What can you do in two hours anyway?
00:45:37.400
It's not enough to really air out the evidence. So I would say that Hawley, I forget how to pronounce
00:45:46.580
his name, he made a good move, as did Matt Gaetz. And anybody who wants to run for president,
00:45:52.360
they'd be smart to do this as well, as a Republican.
00:45:54.760
So I also saw on CNN that Trump and his team have lost, or actually this is from the New York Times,
00:46:07.660
they've lost 59 of the 60 election cases they have brought. How many of the 59, or how many of the 60
00:46:17.280
election cases they brought got evaluated by a court based on the evidence?
00:46:24.760
Is it still zero? It's zero, right? Imagine if this news had been reported,
00:46:31.040
oh, let's say, I don't know, let's pick a word, accurately. Let's say it had been reported
00:46:36.980
accurately. What would it sound like? Here's the same news reported accurately.
00:46:43.560
The courts have not heard a single case in which the evidence for fraud has been presented.
00:46:49.380
Isn't that true? Now, if it's not true, it's only, I blame the media for not informing me,
00:46:57.660
because I watch a lot of news, and I don't know, I've never heard of it. So is it true to say that
00:47:04.460
they've lost 60 cases, or would it be true to say that no case has been heard? No case has been heard
00:47:11.620
on the evidence. So that's your fake news story of the day. I had this amusing thought about Joe
00:47:19.020
Biden, who apparently is lagging a little bit in picking an attorney general. And I thought to
00:47:24.660
myself, how does that conversation go? If you're a candidate for attorney general in a Biden
00:47:31.060
administration, you probably have to meet with him, I assume. He's not going to pick an attorney
00:47:36.740
general without actually talking to the person first. How does that conversation go? Because
00:47:42.200
you know, the only thing that matters to Biden is that Hunter gets off, right? Because although he's
00:47:48.220
the president of the United States, he's also a human being and a father. And I do not fault him
00:47:54.580
the slightest, if he puts his family above me, right? Only because it's natural, and it's biological,
00:48:02.980
and you know, you don't want it to happen, but you understand it, right? People put their family
00:48:08.980
first. You don't want to live in a country where that doesn't happen, do you? Do you want to live
00:48:14.880
in a country where people don't put their family first? Not so much, right? That wouldn't be a good
00:48:20.580
place to live. So I think Biden can be forgiven under the understanding that a father has to act like a
00:48:29.520
father can't turn it off, right? But what does that do to the conversation when a candidate comes
00:48:36.000
into his office, and they're sitting in the Oval Office, and I'm imagining Biden trying to ask the
00:48:41.060
question without asking the question, because it's the only thing he cares about, is what are you going
00:48:45.900
to do about Hunter? And I imagine how he would ask that. It's like, so let me give you a hypothetical.
00:48:52.960
Suppose there was a crime, or lots of them, and it was your job to, let's say you were in charge of
00:49:03.780
prosecuting that crime. But let's say, and I'm just spitballing here, just a hypothetical.
00:49:11.340
Let's say if in the process of pursuing that crime, it caused other problems.
00:49:17.000
We don't need to be specific, but other related problems, and maybe that they were bigger than
00:49:25.820
whatever you were trying to solve by this, let's say, illegality that you're going after.
00:49:32.040
How would you handle that? If doing your job caused a really big problem in an unspecified other way,
00:49:41.120
what would you do about that? Biden almost has to figure out a way to ask the question without
00:49:50.280
asking the question. But maybe it's just understood, and if his aides talk to the person,
00:49:56.880
maybe he doesn't have to say anything himself. All right. I told you yesterday there was a study
00:50:05.320
that said that the leadership variable didn't make much difference in the coronavirus outcome.
00:50:12.480
The study seemed to indicate, and here I'm going to tell you in a moment, it might not be that
00:50:18.700
credible, seemed to indicate that it didn't matter what you did, that your results were going to be
00:50:23.940
some mix of other factors, and that the lockdown, no lockdown, how fast you did it, that sort of
00:50:31.460
thing. Maybe they were not the big variables. But it took about two minutes for Andres Beckhaus,
00:50:37.200
who I always go to as my go-to for looking at data statistics things, and he sort of dismissed it
00:50:45.800
out of hand as being amateurishly, this is my words, not his, but apparently they missed some big
00:50:54.260
concepts in statistics. So you shouldn't make too much out of that. But I asked the reverse question.
00:51:03.880
Has there been any study that showed that leadership did matter? So we don't have a study that shows
00:51:12.200
leadership was irrelevant. So that we have a study, but it may not be that credible, so don't take it
00:51:18.660
too seriously. But what we don't have is a credible study that says, oh yeah, the leadership decisions
00:51:24.920
really made the difference. It's kind of missing, isn't it? Don't you think by now, by now, wouldn't
00:51:33.700
you have, seems kind of obvious, wouldn't there be studies that say, yeah, we've looked at all the
00:51:39.680
variables, and there are a lot of variables, that's the problem, too many variables. We've looked at all
00:51:43.620
the variables, and yeah, we can isolate that 40% of your outcome was because of leadership decisions.
00:51:50.880
Don't you think we should have that by now? Because we have enough data. All the data in the world
00:51:57.000
exists. I don't know how you could not determine that by now. So the fact that it doesn't exist
00:52:02.960
is making me think that my idea that you won't find a correlation stronger and stronger. Because you
00:52:11.880
see a really strong correlation with the islands, right? So you've got your Hawaii's doing better
00:52:17.460
than a lot of the states. You've got New Zealand's doing better than, you know, places with similar
00:52:22.100
cultures. You've got South Korea doing better effectively in Ireland because of the DMZ, etc.
00:52:28.140
Now, I don't know if that correlation will really hold. It's just one that, you know, the human mind
00:52:33.100
sees that pattern, whether it's real or not. And, oh, somebody says, but the UK is not.
00:52:39.720
Would the UK count as an island? I don't know. Because the UK is so connected to Great Britain,
00:52:54.040
maybe more so. The island analogy probably has more to do with the consistency of international
00:53:02.540
travel. And Great Britain is sort of a hub of international travel. So have they shut down
00:53:10.060
travel faster? Maybe. So here's what I would say. When you have an outlier, we probably don't know
00:53:21.260
why it's like it is. And if we did, we would be surprised, I think. So don't assume that leadership
00:53:28.660
is the thing, but we also can't rule it out as being the thing. And that
00:53:34.660
is what I wanted to... Trump should posthumously pardon John McCain. That would be a good troll.
00:53:46.500
All right, I'm just looking at your comments for a moment. Are you all going to celebrate New Year's
00:53:57.100
Eve today? Great Britain is calling. Now, Great Britain, you would have to say that that might be
00:54:08.800
one case where, yeah, I would say, let me say this. You probably could distinguish between the people
00:54:16.340
who said, let's go for herd immunity, as Great Britain famously did, versus those who said, let's
00:54:22.740
not run toward herd immunity. So that might be one that you could distinguish. But short of that,
00:54:30.580
I don't know that the details about masks and lockdowns and stuff are going to be the big difference.
00:54:35.140
You'll be celebrating Dominion. Oh, yes. So yesterday, there was a video of some expert
00:54:48.360
who was testifying about the security of the Dominion voting machines, and said that while he
00:54:55.080
was talking, they were already in them. That was the greatest, that was the greatest subtle
00:55:01.680
thing I've ever heard. It's like, yes, not only are these machines, or at least some of them
00:55:09.260
connected to the internet, and then from there, they're connected to the other machines. So not
00:55:13.760
only is it possible to hack these machines, but while I'm talking, we're in them. Now, I know you
00:55:22.920
didn't quite say it exactly like that, but that's what it sounded like, right? It sounded like you don't
00:55:28.140
have to ask if it's possible. I'm in it right now. Now, if that's what he said, because that's sort of
00:55:34.720
how I heard it, but I feel like I could have misinterpreted that. But if that is what he
00:55:38.440
meant and what he said, that is so awesome. That's like a moment for a nerd. No nerd ever had a better
00:55:48.540
moment than, I'd like to tell you that not only is it possible to get into them, I'm in them right now.
00:55:54.720
I mean, that's just so cool. In a bad way, I suppose. He's in them. Now, do we live in a world
00:56:02.080
in which an expert can say, not only can I get in them, but I am in them, and I would have the power
00:56:08.600
to change votes with the access I already have? And he's an expert. Do you think that that story
00:56:15.100
then becomes a national story, which changes everything? Nope. Nope. Because I don't know if
00:56:24.440
this story is true, right? You have to assume that any story like this, you got to put your
00:56:31.440
skeptical hat on and say, all right, two days from now, is this still going to be true? It looked
00:56:38.160
pretty credible when he said it. You know, if you saw it, it looked real. But that doesn't mean it's
00:56:42.920
real. Covington kids will teach you that. Just because you saw it, just because he said it,
00:56:48.440
just because he's an expert doesn't make any of it true. You have to hear the other side before
00:56:54.120
you know anything. But suppose it's true. Let's just speculate what would happen. Suppose it was
00:57:01.200
just true. How would the news handle it? They will ignore it. You know, Fox News will run a couple
00:57:11.200
stories, and then they'll ignore it too. And then the mainstream media will just say, look over here.
00:57:17.740
And it won't make any difference. So we're way past the point where discovering a crime makes much
00:57:25.540
difference. Because the gatekeepers of our reality, which is, you know, the news and the politicians,
00:57:32.040
will just act like it didn't happen. And they can simply act like it didn't happen and just make that
00:57:38.900
fact disappear. That's the reality we're in right now, that they have that power and know they have
00:57:45.020
the power. They know they can make any story disappear. So that one, if it's true, and I wouldn't
00:57:53.360
give it more than a 50-50 for being true. But if it's true, it won't matter at all. We'll just make it
00:57:59.280
disappear. All right. Is it worth voting? Well, if you don't vote, then the cheating competition, which
00:58:11.460
is really the basis of our system, it's who can cheat the best, then it will make it easier for the
00:58:18.520
other side to cheat and win. So if you want to make it harder to cheat, voting makes a difference,
00:58:23.900
yes. So you have to get it at least close so that your side can cheat enough to get over the edge,
00:58:30.780
because the other side is trying to cheat enough to get over the edge.
00:58:39.060
Will you unblock Tim Poole on Twitter? He's not blocked on Twitter. I don't block him.
00:58:49.000
You don't vote, Scott. Okay, what's your point?
00:58:54.280
Not worth voting. Did you see Pitton? No, I did not. I don't know what that is. Pitton?
00:58:59.900
Is that something I should see? But you don't vote. Why does that matter?
00:59:05.140
I often see a lot of people just say a fact. But a fact isn't an argument. That's just a fact.
00:59:20.080
All right. No Georgia prediction? Yeah, I'll make a Georgia prediction. The Democrats will steal that
00:59:28.220
election. That will be my prediction. Now, if I had to put odds on it, I wouldn't put it at 100%.
00:59:35.120
I'd say, let's say, 70% chance Democrats will still steal it. And, you know, 70% chance that if it were not
00:59:48.940
stolen, the Republicans would win. But 70% chance they will steal it and get away with it. And get away
01:00:00.960
January 6th prediction? I don't know that fate will be changed on January 6th. I do have a big question,
01:00:12.060
as I said earlier, about whether the actual fraud evidence will be presented in any form to the
01:00:17.240
American public. And by the way, why doesn't Trump just set up some kind of a media event where the
01:00:24.160
strongest fraud evidence is brought in? And in a non-court setting, just present it all. Now, ideally,
01:00:32.160
you would want people representing the opposite side to be there too, and just have like a little
01:00:37.560
court-like debate situation in which you can see both sides. I'd like to see it.
01:00:44.520
You really are a bitter man, says this person who will never have to see me again. I now solved your
01:00:55.260
problem. Boom. I'm like a doctor. I'm like a doctor.
01:01:13.620
December 23rd, White House staff were told to stop packing up to leave. I doubt that. That sounds
01:01:19.220
like fake news. Is Linwood trustworthy? Is he a lawyer? He's a lawyer. Lawyers are advocates.
01:01:27.620
Advocates. Advocates are not intended to be credible. Advocates are meant to get their side.
01:01:37.160
You know, they want their client to win. They want to have victory. No, you shouldn't.
01:01:43.280
If the Democrats steal the election, they'll have enough power to avoid consequences. That's right.
01:01:48.080
So if the Democrats do steal the election, they can get away with it, because then they'll have all
01:01:53.380
the power. There would be no counter to it at that point. So if you use my theory that you always have
01:02:01.620
corruption under these circumstances, which is that the upside potential is really high,
01:02:08.720
you're pretty sure you can get away with it, and you've got a lot of people involved,
01:02:12.900
so there's always somebody willing to take that risk. That all exists. Beyond that,
01:02:18.760
it's the biggest stakes that have ever existed, because it would be full control of one party.
01:02:26.060
Now, if that were to happen, they would be invulnerable from any kind of prosecution. They
01:02:32.820
would just have too much power. So they should, under this condition, they should do everything they
01:02:40.200
can to steal this election. All of the setup is such that it would almost be irrational not to steal it.
01:02:47.580
Wouldn't you say? What would be the reasoning not to steal it? Okay, let's say you're in charge
01:02:55.420
in some way, and you're some Democratic operative who's in charge. And your minions, let's say
01:03:02.740
hypothetically, have brought to you a proposal of how they can steal the election. And they say,
01:03:08.820
look, we know we can win this thing. We'll do fraud A, fraud B, fraud C. It'll be packetized,
01:03:16.080
so even if they catch one of it, it won't be enough. So here's our plan. We can definitely
01:03:21.480
steal it. The odds of getting caught and going to jail are, I hate to say it, but as high as maybe
01:03:28.480
25%. What does the Democratic operative say to that proposition? Here's what he says.
01:03:36.760
Clarify for me. Who is it who goes to jail in this scenario? And the person says, oh, I didn't mean
01:03:43.100
you. You wouldn't go to jail, because nobody knows we had this conversation, and you're not going to do
01:03:48.880
any of the fraud. You're just sort of approving it. And, you know, you'll deny it, so there's no evidence
01:03:54.220
there. The only person who would go to jail is the actual person doing the fraud, the person double
01:04:00.140
counting votes or something like that. And then the top Democratic operative says, I don't even know
01:04:06.100
those people. Are you telling me that I could have total power, probably 75% chance, and I don't
01:04:15.960
personally have any risk, because I'm not going to go to jail. And I'll just say, I didn't know these
01:04:20.880
guys were frauding. So I have no risk, but I could have total power if this works out. 25% chance it won't.
01:04:30.140
What do I say? Go. I say go, because those are good odds. Now, what about the person who's actually
01:04:38.680
doing the crime? Would you do a crime where you had a 25% chance of getting caught? How many of you
01:04:46.960
would do a crime where the beneficiary is mostly other people? Because you're not president. You're
01:04:53.620
just the person messing with some ballots. Maybe you get paid, right? But you're just a person messing
01:04:59.080
with ballots. You don't have a giant upside to your life. You've got a 25% chance of getting caught and
01:05:05.260
going to jail. Do you do the crime? Well, it doesn't matter how many of you say no. It only matters
01:05:13.920
there's one person who says yes for each individual fraud thing that could happen, right? You only need
01:05:21.500
some people to say yes. You don't think you could get people to do crime when they have a 75% chance of
01:05:27.960
getting away with it. Yeah. A 75% chance of getting away with crime? You would get massive numbers of
01:05:34.740
people who would agree to that. You wouldn't. I wouldn't. Probably almost nobody on this periscope
01:05:42.640
would. But there are a lot of them. Oh, yeah. It wouldn't be hard at all. And part of it is they
01:05:47.880
just would think, well, that's 25% chance, but not my specific situation. My specific situation,
01:05:56.540
I'm pretty sure I'll get away with this. So, yeah, people would think they could get away with it.
01:06:02.860
The incentive is sky high. How could there not be massive attempt at fraud? It doesn't even seem
01:06:10.300
possible that it could be an honest election. I don't see any possibility. Do you? With that set up,
01:06:18.300
it just can't happen. So that's my prediction. It will be massive fraud. It has to be, really.
01:06:27.460
Somebody said bomber pilots had a 25% loss rate but went anyway. All right. There you go.
01:06:34.260
You can get people to do things at those odds and it's not that hard. Would you tell us if you made
01:06:41.640
a political deal? I love that question. I don't know exactly what that means, but do you mean a
01:06:48.100
political deal as in somebody in politics would pay me to say something? Is that what you're talking
01:06:54.880
about? Or are you talking about somebody else making a political deal? But to answer your question,
01:07:02.420
if I made a secret political deal, I wouldn't tell you because it would be a secret, but I wouldn't
01:07:08.780
make a political deal like that because I don't need to. There's no upside for me. If I were to double
01:07:14.340
my net worth, it just wouldn't make much difference. Yeah, I'd still be sitting here at this time of day,
01:07:22.060
still be doing this, still be wearing this crappy t-shirt to bed, still be doing this in my pajamas.
01:07:27.400
It wouldn't make much difference. So they could try to bribe me, but I don't know why I would take
01:07:32.900
that. It wouldn't feel right. All right. That's all I got. And I will talk to you tomorrow.